If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Traderumor, you've said something I've always thought. Why is it clubs will give $8 million a year to an average pitcher and then act like it's a burden to pay a tenth of that for a guy who runs the entire baseball operation and has a far bigger impact than (almost) any individual player?

On second thought, I know why, and it goes back to points people have made before... just like players, most GMs and managers are thoroughly replaceable. No sense paying $2 million when you can land any of ten guys just like him for half of that. The idea, of course, is to find someone who isn't Just Another Guy, and money works pretty well for that sort of thing.

For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

While I agree that Jocketty is a good GM, he certainly hasn't gotten there through the farm route.

Look at the Cards roster. Only Pujols, Molina are original Cards from the starting 8, and only Thompson from the expected pitching staff. The Cards ability to spend a pretty hefty payroll (wisely) is their claim to fame, not a remarkable farm system.

that's only half the picture. Their farm has provided them the leverage to acquire many of the players that are on their roster. It doesn't have to be about who they currently have that came up with them.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Originally Posted by PuffyPig

While I agree that Jocketty is a good GM, he certainly hasn't gotten there through the farm route.

Look at the Cards roster. Only Pujols, Molina are original Cards from the starting 8, and only Thompson from the expected pitching staff. The Cards ability to spend a pretty hefty payroll (wisely) is their claim to fame, not a remarkable farm system.

Though they have leveraged that farm system to make remarkable trades.

Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

The interesting thing about the three names that I threw out there is that they all go about their craft as artisans. All three have developed their own method to the madness, but most of it is artistry. They have a unique gift. So I'd take any of them, give them the reigns, and enjoy sipping sodas and watching good baseball in the expensive seats every night.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Originally Posted by M2

Who knows, maybe bringing in Weaver would get Dunn, Harang and Felipe talking LTC.

I don't think this point can be overstated. This is an excellent point--one that undergirds my yen for acquiring a guy like Contreras for one year at the cost of Kearns, Pena, whomever. Moves are never ultimately made in isolation, and it's crucial to keep selling the team (both to the fans and the players) as you rebuild it.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Originally Posted by M2

Good point about building around quality leadership. That's a corporate concept that often seems lacking in professional sports.

But I've been turning over the idea of Jeff Weaver in my mind of late and I'm starting to think that he might be worth a one-year flyer. No way I'd want him for more than that, but the Reds have some spending room in the budget (or at least they should) and Weaver's probably looking to prove himself on a one-year deal at the moment. You probably could whip-saw him on price because he'll cost you a second rounder (though hopefully pick up something better than that at the trade deadline or next winter).

Weaver's got his downside and it's significant, but whoever gets him on a one-year deal gets him at what should be his most focused and in his prime. You might be able to steal a year with the guy, kind of like what Cleveland did with Millwood. The Reds can offer lots of offensive support and if he falls flat he's off the books soon enough.

Not that this idea thrills me, just that it's not as unappealing as a lot of other options facing the club at the moment. Who knows, maybe bringing in Weaver would get Dunn, Harang and Felipe talking LTC.

Nothing wrong with filling holes with free agents, but only if the VORP justifies it. The thing that those dipping into the free agent market in the current climate don't seem to all realize quite yet is that these are no longer guys simply trying to cash in a huge contract but actually may pay for themselves (true stars) like in the early days of free agency. These are primarily guys who have priced themselves out of their current employers because the current employers realize the player is a negative return on investment at the asking price. The guys who are worth Free Agent money are locked up with their current teams and never make it to Free Agency (Pujols, Oswalt come to mind off the top of my head). A good example of this is Weaver and Washburn. These are guys coming from two deep pocketed teams, but they were sent packing. There are what, maybe half a dozen decent free agent buys these days, and that may be a high number.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

I never looked at that trade as being just for Dave Williams. The savings was key, because it turns out now that the deal was for Dave Williams and these arb signings.

Except they already had plenty of money for the arb signings without making that deal. They've still got close to $10M of the pre-Casey bubble to spend.

IF the Reds dumped Casey to pay off arb contracts then they did so on top of a payroll slash at a time when league revenues are bursting at the seams. I'm no fan of the current management/ownership, but I give them more credit that that.

Last edited by M2; 01-17-2006 at 05:36 PM.

Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

Trading Casey last off season would have been about the money. Absent any kind of trend of behavior that would indicate a cohesive plan, its difficult to determine what was addressed by trading him this year. Presumptively, it would have been to free up firstbase for Dunn, or Griffey.

Harang and the Reds avoided arbitration by agreeing to a one-year, $2.35 million contract Tuesday.

That's quite a bump from the $440,000 Harang pulled in last year.

Harang earned the raise by establishing himself as the Reds' most reliable starter in '05. His 11-13 record doesn't tell the whole story, as Harang consistently kept his team in position to win the game and often didn't receive much run support.

Harang's number of victories (11), quality starts (19), innings pitched (211 2/3) and strikeouts (163) were all career highs. He also tied for the team lead with one complete game.

By notching 211 2/3 innings of work, Harang became the first Reds pitcher with 200 innings in a season since right-hander Elmer Dessens led the staff with 205 innings in 2001.

The Reds will sort out their pitching staff in Spring Training, and Harang is expected to be at or near the top of the rotation. This will be the 27-year-old's fourth season with Cincinnati. He was obtained in the midseason trade in 2003 that sent Jose Guillen to the A's.

Two arbitration-eligible players -- shortstop Felipe Lopez and first baseman Adam Dunn -- remain on the Reds' 40-man roster. Tuesday is the deadline for clubs and players to exchange salary figures for the arbitration hearings, which begin Feb. 1.

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

But I've been turning over the idea of Jeff Weaver in my mind of late and I'm starting to think that he might be worth a one-year flyer.

I'd give Weaver two years. We're not going to be competitive anyhow in the next 2 years. Then his deal rolls off with Milton's deal.

The team has enough revenue to absorb Weaver for 2 years. Supposedly they offered 3 to Morris.

Offering Weaver 2 years might give us the edge to sign him, and if he bounces back, you enjoy the reward for 2 years. If he flops, you're really no worse off than not signing him.. Sure, it costs payflex, but it's not like we don't have the money.

Thank you Walt and Bob for bringing winning baseball back to Cincy

Nov. 13, 2007: One of the greatest days in Reds history: John Allen gets the boot!

Re: Aaron Harang is in the books for one year at $2.35 million

I'd give Weaver two years. We're not going to be competitive anyhow in the next 2 years. Then his deal rolls off with Milton's deal.

The team has enough revenue to absorb Weaver for 2 years. Supposedly they offered 3 to Morris.

Offering Weaver 2 years might give us the edge to sign him, and if he bounces back, you enjoy the reward for 2 years. If he flops, you're really no worse off than not signing him.. Sure, it costs payflex, but it's not like we don't have the money.

No way I'd give him two years.

First off, my interest in him hinges on him working relatively cheap. I don't think he's a all that good a pitcher and I certainly don't he's worth anywhere near what he's been asking.

Second, Weaver likely doesn't want a two-year deal. He's in the same place Kevin Millwood was last year where he's got to find a club that's committed to giving him a regular shot in the rotation for something in the $6M -$7M range. He might have to accept less than Millwood because there's draft pick compensation attached to him. If he pitches well, then there'll be money waiting on the other side.

I'd have no interest in him without the monetary incentive to pitch for his next contract attached to his 2006 season. As it is I think there's a decent chance he'd lay an egg with the Reds, but for short money and the facade that you went out and signed a veteran pitcher I'd be willing to take the chance that he might put a good season together.

And if he did put that season together, I'd let him walk because I wouldn't be looking for lightning to strike twice. IMO, it would be a grandiose mistake to fall in love with Jeff Weaver or to throw a lot of money at him. My interest in him is extremely narrow.

Baseball isn't a magic trick ... it doesn't get spoiled if you figure out how it works. - gonelong

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most
importantly, enjoy yourselves!

RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball